You are "not allowed to park at any time" in the marked area. If it isn't marked correctly it isn't "the area". For defence you will probably need a photo of the ends on the 2 lines and the missing cross bar, if that is your defence!
|
Hi there, Armitage Shanks, if one obtained this proof by a clear photo, then would one get the ticket scrubbed ?
Cheers, Graham.
|
Lines not in accordance with regulations = lines not legal = no offence SFAIK.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi there alebear, I dont park on double yellows, but just wondered about the legal aspect of it if the line is not crossed at the end. Some time ago, i heard of some-one who parked on a double yellow that was not crossed at the end, got a ticket, went to court, and the court agreed with him. Thanks, Graham.
|
To make a Traffic Regulation Order lawful then it has to be signed in accordanced with authorised signing and in the case of DYL this is set out in the Traffic Signs General Directions 2002 Diagram 1018 which shows a T Bar at the end..
There are pre decriminalisation (Police enforced as opposed to LA take over) cases which state that if the signs do not conform the TRO is unenforeceable. MacCleod v Hamilton [1965] and contradicted in Cotterill v Chapman [1984] which came down on the de-minimus rule (minor deviations acceptable).
Post decrimininalisation there is decision made by Parking adjudicator Minier v Camden (PATAS Case No 203022636A (2003/04)
No T Bar. Law does not concern itself with triffles (echoing Cotterill v Chapman above). The line clearly defined the restriction and ended adjacent to white line of a parkingbay,
Held that the defect was so immaterial and so minor that could not be relied upon to be unlawful.
But depending on the state of the rest of the signing a case may well be made out.
Parking Attendants will continue to issue tickets nevertheless and it will be up to the alleged offender to plead his case to the Adjudicator.
dvd
|
Hi there, dvd, thanks for the info, graham.
|
|
|
Davies v Heatley 1971, which must be quoted in any appeal regarding markings.
The yellow lines with incorrect signage are not illegal, they are just meaningless. Unless they are regarded as graffiti I suppose.
|
|
|
|
>>Some time ago, i heard of some-one who parked on a double yellow that was not crossed at the end........>>
I recall something similar, but the nearest I can find is:
tinyurl.com/y8y39u
One quite irate forum (!):
boards.fool.co.uk/Message.asp?mid=9384648&sort=who...e
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
Hi there, stuartli, a good read, Cheers, graham.
|
|
It is possible to be convicted for breaking the "spirit of the law" and not the "letter of the law".
|
|
|
Re the case I recall about missing T-bars or lines. It involved a small town centre of the type of those in the Cotswolds or similar; the ines were not complete and, IIRC, the T-bar was missing.
A motorist who had received a parking ticket was demonstrating to the reporter and camera man the various points which he felt rendered the ticket unenforceable.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
hi stuartli, i wonder if he got off with it ? cheers, graham.
|
|
One should never identify all the non-compliances, one should endeavour to save some for another day ;-)
|
one should endeavour to
save some for another day ;-)
Sound advice.....think about it.
MD
|
It was around Northallerton - he got away with it by getting photographic evidence .
Read all about it here archive.thenorthernecho.co.uk/2002/1/4/149787.html
|
|
I'm sure that must refer to someone else. The posts on Motley Fool were dated 2005.
|
Strictly speaking he didn't "get away with it". If the regs for yellow lines aren't followed, then no offence has occurred, since they're not a legal sign.
There is a legal precedent that states that no contravention has occurred if the signs don't exactly conform, even if the sign is clearly recognisable to any reasonable person.
|
Davies v Heatley 1971
Have I mentioned that before? ;-)
It's very important to refer to the case in any appeal regarding signage because we can't expect the authorities to be aware of the legal requirements, that would be ridiculous.
|
Thanks to every-one for all your comments on this subject, cheers,Graham.
|
Why do a lot of people always want to bend/challenge the rules? If there were double yellow lines I wouldn't dream of looking to see whether they had the required terminations just so I could try to get away with parking there.
--
L\'escargot.
|
I never park on double yellows, but with increasingly agressive enforcement of parking restrictions by local councils purely to make a profit I'm happy to see more challenges to parking tickets and incorrect signage.
Remember the law works both ways - if they wish to prosecute then they must also follow the law exactly, otherwise they themselves are the offenders.
|
That's OK L'escargot, more parking spaces for me!
I would never dream of bending parking rules, and I expect the authorities to do likewise.
|
We all know what double lines mean, whether they have the usual terminations or not. With all the petty machinations by people who know they are guilty, no wonder enforcement of the law costs us so much.
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
What happens if the correctly painted lines are obscured by a heavy fall of leaves? This happened to a colleague who was not aware she had parked on double yellows until she returned to the vehicle and picked up her ticket. She just paid the fine but I would have thought if she had taken a picture she may have got away with it.
|
What happens if the correctly painted lines are obscured by a heavy fall of leaves? This happened to a colleague who was not aware she had parked on double yellows until she returned to the vehicle and picked up her ticket. She just paid the fine but I would have thought if she had taken a picture she may have got away with it.
She was guilty. Why would she have wanted to try to "get away with it"?
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
Because she did not realise she had parked on the double yellow lines until she had got the ticket because they were covered up
|
Because she did not realise she had parked on the double yellow lines until she had got the ticket because they were covered up
I didn't realise I had exceeded the speed limit because my speedo wasn't working at the time, but I didn't consider it was grounds for me to challenge the SP30.
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
But your speedo is supposed to be working.Would you think to move leaves to check for yellow lines?
|
"Get Away with it" is an emotive and inappropriate phrase. People who can't see double yellow lines are not guilty of an offence because the lines do not conform with the law.
A structure is set up, of rules and regulations with which we are legally required to comply. Similarly the rules and regulations must be applied fairly and correctly. If a sign is obscured, does not conform to the laid down dimensions or whatever, then nobody has got away with anything - the rules do not apply because the signage is incorrect or illegal.
|
There's that recent case where a driver successfully appealed against a speeding conviction because the signs were obscured by bushes.
I imagine if a double yellow line was completely obscured by leaves, and you had photos to prove it, then that might also be grounds for appeal.
|
|
There is a row of double yellow lines outside our local theatre. One section has been repainted, another has been gradually allowed to fade away. In places the lines are still visible, in others completely rubbed out, probably by people parking on them. It seems clear the authorities have intentionally de-regulated the lines, but the doubt will still remain until all the people who remember them have died.
|
|
I suppose we could asume that there are double yellow lines on every road surface throughout the country. Or perhaps we should carry a broom and help local councils highway department keep the lines nice and clean. I did notice that this year there did seem to be more leaves than previous years. If a speedo is not working you can actually see it is not working and therefore you can be extra careful whilst driving the vehicle.
|
It works both ways L'escargot, the last penalty charge notice I received and paid was for a two minute overstay, I asked the attendant to be reasonable. No. I appealed and asked the local authority to be reasonable. No.
So if "they" want to play by the rules then so will I.
If the lines do not comply to the legislation then they are meaningless and there is no offence/infringment to be guilty of.
|
Hi there, just a note to why i was asking this question in the first place. I recently paid a visit to my doctors, and parking there is a nightmare at the best of times, but with such a tiny car, i usually fit it in a particular spot. I am getting on a bit now, have high blood pressure, and a pace-maker fitted for a heart complaint. I am not entitled to a blue badge. On my last visit i was going to park in this tiny space, and noticed double yellows had been painted there, but not crossed at the end, hence wondered if they were legal or not.i was not sure,so drove off. I never park on double yellows. Thank-you all for the reply, cheers, Graham.
|
I'll try and post a fuller link later because it contains much else of interest, but the parking adjudicators recent annual report includes in its case digest the following:-
MISSING T BARS AND WEAR AND TEAR TO
YELLOW LINES
The motorist did not dispute having parked on double yellow lines but argued that
the restriction could not be enforced because of the poor condition of the lines
and the absence of a T bar at the end. The Adjudicator held that lines need not be
maintained in perfect condition. The question is whether the state and quality of the
lines at any one time make it clear to motorists that double yellow lines are present.
The T bar is intended to inform motorists where the restriction begins and ends. The
absence of a T bar does not automatically render unenforceable the whole yellow
line. Each case will depend upon its own particular facts. However, the absence of a
T bar may persuade the Adjudicator that the restriction was not properly signed in
the case of a vehicle parked on or near to the end of the restriction.
|
On a related matter tonight our local TV news had a story about on street parking in Scarborough. The lines and signage around the town are so far off the mark in terms of meeting required standards that no penalty notices have been served for over 2 years.
As a result income from parking fines has dropped from £170,000 to £50,000 and the Council have no money to update the signage. As an example signs showing the restriction were on posts about 12 inches high so the top of the sign was level with a dwarf wall.
|
>>If a speedo is not working you can actually see it is not working and therefore you can be extra careful whilst driving the vehicle.
The contruction and use regs might have something to say about that.
|
|
Fortunately, Davies v Heatley 1971 overrules the "adjudicator" in a court of law. But the adjudicator needs to be told this.
|
Not sure Davies v Heatley, whic concerned a moving traffic offence in 1970, will be good authority on facts of a parking case in 2007.
In that case the markings, solid no overtaking lines, were defective (incorrectly spaced and with previous broken line still visible) at the point where the alleged offence occurred. Mr Davies may have been less lucky - the court found in his favour "reluctantly" - if the lines had continued with the actual defect three bends further down the road.
The adjudicators make clear in the digest that they decide cases on their facts. T bars may be in play if they are absent close to the site of the infringement, its no good hoping they are missing 400m down the road.
Interesting opportunity for somone to extend their mortgage asking for Judicial Review of an adjudicators decision.
|
Thank-you all once again for all the info provided, Graham.
|
Case law set in 1970 is quite recent by the standards of our cumbersome legal system. Is Cotterill v Chapman 1984 more suitable?
">its no good hoping they are missing 400m down the road.<"
If the signage doesn't comply (this also means road markings) then there is no offence. That's what the law says. That's why it's so important to refer to Davies vs Heatley in any appeal, to ensure that the adjudicator is aware of the law, which is more important than the mere opinion of an adjudicator. Otherwise, there is a risk that the adjudicator might make it up as he/she went along.
My understanding is that no Judicial Review is required, just get the case into a court of law, but that might be the difficult bit because it's easier to give up.
|
Thanks Micky for the info, Graham.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
